lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Nov]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.10-rc1-mm2-V0.7.1

* Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com <Mark_H_Johnson@raytheon.com> wrote:

> >does the ping phenomenon go away if you chrt both the networking IRQ
> >thread and both ksoftirqd's to above the RT task's priority?
>
> For the most part, yes. I reran the test with -V0.7.7 and had
> continuous ping responses until the system locked up with yet another
> deadlock. This did NOT fix the display / mouse movement lockups. All
> IRQ and ksoftirqd tasks were RT 99 priority for this test. latencytest
> ran at RT 30 priority.

what priority does events/0 and events/1 have? keventd handles part of
the mouse/keyboard workload.

> The deadlock was between the two ksoftirqd tasks...

there was one place missing - does the patch below fix this type of
deadlock?

Ingo

--- linux/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c.orig2
+++ linux/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c
@@ -208,6 +208,7 @@ static void tcp_delack_timer(unsigned lo
struct sock *sk = (struct sock*)data;
struct tcp_opt *tp = tcp_sk(sk);

+ rcu_read_lock_read(&ptype_lock);
bh_lock_sock(sk);
if (sock_owned_by_user(sk)) {
/* Try again later. */
@@ -261,6 +262,7 @@ out:
sk_stream_mem_reclaim(sk);
out_unlock:
bh_unlock_sock(sk);
+ rcu_read_unlock_read(&ptype_lock);
sock_put(sk);
}

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:07    [W:0.039 / U:1.156 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site